When TRANNIES kill people...Were they born that way???

[jusplay4fun]

by Apatheist » Sun Jul 26, 2026 3:29 pm

jusplay4Fun said:
Let's make this very simple: today's so called trans-gender women do not have a vagina, do not have a period, and cannot get pregnant. THEY ARE NOT women.

Some women are born without a vagina due to congenital conditions like Mayer-von Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser Syndrome (MRKH) or vaginal agenesis, which affects about 1 in every 4,000 to 5,000 female births. Other women may not have a vagina due to surgical removal. Older women do not have periods and cannot get pregnant. Are they not women either?
This is why your definition is TOO simple, in my view.

That is why I said "make this very simple" as OF COURSE we can get into the medical exceptions. Of course women who are older cannot get pregnant once they get to a certain stage and/or age. That is an obvious case, right? They could have gotten pregnant before menopause, right? (And OF Course, this is barring medical issues about being able to become pregnant.) And having XX chromosomes a birth, to again keep it simple.

I am trying to clarify the matter of "transgender women" in sports and in regards to mass shootings. AND NO, most mass shooters are NOT trans-anything or "Trannies" as put in the OP or the title of this thread.

As for transgender women in sports, I think that Duk made several good points. Specifically having a "recent man" now "transitioning to becoming a woman" in women's swimming or volleyball (and MANY sports) is simply absurd and should not happen.

[jimboston]

I had a feeling those might be the responses.

You must hate Trans people and want to kill them, even asking the questions IS VIOLENCE.

Sorry, but that's just nonsense.
I'm asking the question because nobody has yet, as far as I know, come up with a definition of "a woman" that satisfies both trans and bio women as far as inclusion in women-only spaces is concerned - this includes refuges, toilets, changing rooms, and representation (which was the basis of the Scottish court ruling). Personally, I don't think the issue will be resolved until this agreed definition exists, although I would very much like to see that happen.
FYI I knew someone who was transsexual more than 25 years ago, before it became fashionable (and an excuse to avoid punishment).

Let's make this very simple: today's so called trans-gender women do not have a vagina, do not have a period, and cannot get pregnant. THEY ARE NOT women.

Some women are born without a vagina due to congenital conditions like Mayer-von Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser Syndrome (MRKH) or vaginal agenesis, which affects about 1 in every 4,000 to 5,000 female births. Other women may not have a vagina due to surgical removal. Older women do not have periods and cannot get pregnant. Are they not women either?
This is why your definition is TOO simple, in my view.

The idea of "safe spaces" seems to be an absurdity. Nobody should assault you anywhere you go, but if you want to redefine speaking honestly as a micro-assault or whatever the crazies call it, then you own the problem.

How about refuges for women who have been assaulted physically by men? Are their "safe spaces" (ie women-only refuges) absurd? I'm not talking about misgendering, but those who have been physically attacked - what we used to call "battered wives", or victims of domestic abuse.

My entire post was sarcasm. Just saying.

I thought the “extremeness” of my post would make that obvious. I apologize that was not the case. I assumed you are some olde poster who was banned using a different profile so you might remember my sense of humor. That’s a big assumption on my part.

[jusplay4fun]

I had a feeling those might be the responses.

You must hate Trans people and want to kill them, even asking the questions IS VIOLENCE.

Sorry, but that's just nonsense.
I'm asking the question because nobody has yet, as far as I know, come up with a definition of "a woman" that satisfies both trans and bio women as far as inclusion in women-only spaces is concerned - this includes refuges, toilets, changing rooms, and representation (which was the basis of the Scottish court ruling). Personally, I don't think the issue will be resolved until this agreed definition exists, although I would very much like to see that happen.
FYI I knew someone who was transsexual more than 25 years ago, before it became fashionable (and an excuse to avoid punishment).

Let's make this very simple: today's so called trans-gender women do not have a vagina, do not have a period, and cannot get pregnant. THEY ARE NOT women.

Some women are born without a vagina due to congenital conditions like Mayer-von Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser Syndrome (MRKH) or vaginal agenesis, which affects about 1 in every 4,000 to 5,000 female births. Other women may not have a vagina due to surgical removal. Older women do not have periods and cannot get pregnant. Are they not women either?
This is why your definition is TOO simple, in my view.

The idea of "safe spaces" seems to be an absurdity. Nobody should assault you anywhere you go, but if you want to redefine speaking honestly as a micro-assault or whatever the crazies call it, then you own the problem.

How about refuges for women who have been assaulted physically by men? Are their "safe spaces" (ie women-only refuges) absurd? I'm not talking about misgendering, but those who have been physically attacked - what we used to call "battered wives", or victims of domestic abuse.

My entire post was sarcasm. Just saying.

I thought the “extremeness” of my post would make that obvious. I apologize that was not the case. I assumed you are some olde poster who was banned using a different profile so you might remember my sense of humor. That’s a big assumption on my part.

"different profile"? really? more sarcasm? or more humor?

[Apatheist]

People do have extreme views, this is a seriously divisive subject, so I take your post at face value. There are people who are just as passionate on both sides of the debate.
Why would you assume I was banned and would remember you? That would require me to have been around at the same time that you were previously and your posts to be astonishingly memorable, which I doubt based on current evidence Anyway, this is not the case. I suggest you put a smiley face or something if your post is not to be taken seriously.
Do you have a serious point to make?

Is there anyone here on the pro-trans side of the debate?

There was one interesting incident recently in which a trans man - who had a beard but was wearing a pink dress and pink bunny ears, so it was hard to see how they were "living as a man", which they need to do in some places before transitioning - was complained about as leering at a woman in a changing room (and it was later revealed to have a history of so doing). The complainer happened to be a black lesbian.
Some will say that, being still genetically female, they should have been using the women's facilities; others will say that, as they identified as a male, they should be allowed to use the men's (although this is more commonly an issue for male bodies using female changing rooms, which many bio women are not comfortable with).
Of course, those who side with the complainer were labelled as transphobes; those who sided with the trans man were labelled as racist homophobes. Nobody wins.

[jusplay4fun]

People do have extreme views, this is a seriously divisive subject, so I take your post at face value. There are people who are just as passionate on both sides of the debate.
Why would you assume I was banned and would remember you? That would require me to have been around at the same time that you were previously and your posts to be astonishingly memorable, which I doubt based on current evidence Anyway, this is not the case. I suggest you put a smiley face or something if your post is not to be taken seriously.
Do you have a serious point to make?

Is there anyone here on the pro-trans side of the debate?

There was one interesting incident recently in which a trans man - who had a beard but was wearing a pink dress and pink bunny ears, so it was hard to see how they were "living as a man", which they need to do in some places before transitioning - was complained about as leering at a woman in a changing room (and it was later revealed to have a history of so doing). The complainer happened to be a black lesbian.
Some will say that, being still genetically female, they should have been using the women's facilities; others will say that, as they identified as a male, they should be allowed to use the men's (although this is more commonly an issue for male bodies using female changing rooms, which many bio women are not comfortable with).
Of course, those who side with the complainer were labelled as transphobes; those who sided with the trans man were labelled as racist homophobes. Nobody wins.

You are correct, Apatheist; this is a divisive issue, but is so only for a few. Those few are not here or are currently quiet in this Forum.

[jimboston]

"different profile"? really? more sarcasm? or more humor?

Yes. I know YOU wouldn’t understand. None of my comments were intended for your consumption. Sorry if you can’t keep up.

[jimboston]

People do have extreme views, this is a seriously divisive subject, so I take your post at face value. There are people who are just as passionate on both sides of the debate.
Why would you assume I was banned and would remember you? That would require me to have been around at the same time that you were previously and your posts to be astonishingly memorable, which I doubt based on current evidence Anyway, this is not the case. I suggest you put a smiley face or something if your post is not to be taken seriously.
Do you have a serious point to make?

Is there anyone here on the pro-trans side of the debate?

There was one interesting incident recently in which a trans man - who had a beard but was wearing a pink dress and pink bunny ears, so it was hard to see how they were "living as a man", which they need to do in some places before transitioning - was complained about as leering at a woman in a changing room (and it was later revealed to have a history of so doing). The complainer happened to be a black lesbian.
Some will say that, being still genetically female, they should have been using the women's facilities; others will say that, as they identified as a male, they should be allowed to use the men's (although this is more commonly an issue for male bodies using female changing rooms, which many bio women are not comfortable with).
Of course, those who side with the complainer were labelled as transphobes; those who sided with the trans man were labelled as racist homophobes. Nobody wins.

This person has multiple mental disorders… not just gender dysmorphia but also the seemingly pervasive “Main Character Syndrome” affecting many people who have been conditioned by Social Media & Covid.

The issue is divisive. Yes there are crazy people on the Right who think we should just kill or deport all Transpeople… but IMHO it’s the extreme Pro-Trans that are driving most of the divisiveness. I won’t use the phrase “anti-Trans”, I would prefer “Pro-Biology” or “Pro-Logic”, as people on the “Middle Right” are able to use logic and biology in their arguments. The “Pro-Trans” side only has subjective “feelings”.

[DirtyDishSoap]

Just when I thought this site couldn't get any fucking dumber, Confed rips something off of Facebook and runs with it. Mostly because he's a fucking idiot.

[Pack Rat]

Just when I thought this site couldn't get any fucking dumber, Confed rips something off of Facebook and runs with it. Mostly because he's a fucking idiot.

Look who is calling the kettle black, lol.

[jimboston]

Just when I thought this site couldn't get any fucking dumber, Confed rips something off of Facebook and runs with it. Mostly because he's a fucking idiot.

Look who is calling the kettle black, lol.

You can’t agree with Confed… can you?

[jimboston]

Just when I thought this site couldn't get any fucking dumber, Confed rips something off of Facebook and runs with it. Mostly because he's a fucking idiot.

Look who is calling the kettle black, lol.

You can’t agree with Confed… can you?

I mean he’s not wrong about “transwomen” being just a short way of saying “weird confused guy with mental disorders”… but he’s wrong on almost everything else.

[DirtyDishSoap]

I see Pack Rat still wants to follow me around.



Look! J4 is over there! Go get him boy!

[Apatheist]

Just when I thought this site couldn't get any fucking dumber, Confed rips something off of Facebook and runs with it. Mostly because he's a fucking idiot.

Look who is calling the kettle black, lol.

You can’t agree with Confed… can you?

I mean he’s not wrong about “transwomen” being just a short way of saying “weird confused guy with mental disorders”… but he’s wrong on almost everything else.

Well, opinion differs on that. Do you not believe that trans people have a right to be who they feel that they are?
The one I knew years ago told me that she transitioned because of what she "felt inside". Unfortunately I wasn't sufficiently aware at the the time to ask what that was, but it was very clear that she didn't feel comfortable being seen as a man.
If you believe that there are, or should be, only heterosexual men and woman, then I can see why you'd see it as a mental disorder.
Remember, though, that people thought similar things about homosexuality, and tried to "cure" it with some pretty appalling "therapy", before it was understood better, and there's now a thought that it has a genetic component. Is it entirely impossible that people who feel the need to transition have a genetic difference (that we don't yet understand) that mean it's not simply a mental disorder? It may be abnormal in the sense that it's a minority and not the norm, but can you say with 100% certainty that we fully understand the reasons and it not something they're born with?
It's a separate issue as to whether this entitles them to be in women-only spaces, jobs, sports, etc - but would you concede that the cause is not yet properly understood?
Or perhaps you continue to see homosexuality as a mental disorder?

[jimboston]

They have a right to “feel” however they want to feel.

They can dress however they want, they can change their names, they can get different hair, shit (if they’re legal adults) they can cut off their dicks and balls too. None of that affects me and so I give none of it any mind.

They don’t have a “right” to “be” anything they want if “being” something means literally transitioning from a man and becoming a woman. They don’t have this “right” because this is a matter of biology and it is just NOT possible. You can take a man, pump him with estrogen, cut off his dick and balls, do some weird plastic surgery and make a fake vagina, etc… you still don’t have a woman. What you have is a mutilated man. A person has a right to do this to themselves, but I don’t need to know about it, I don’t need to now accept that this person is a woman, and I don’t wanna pay for it.

Transwomen claim to be women. The “slogan” is “A transwoman is a woman”… period, full stop. If you don’t agree with that statement they call you “transphobic” and claim you want to kill them. This is the current state of debate. from the far left on this subject. It’s ridiculous.

Perhaps in the future we will create clones, and before the embryo’s develop we’ll have tech to force a specific embryo to develop into a specific sex… and then if we have this tech and we can transfer a person’s consciousness from their olde body to their new body… well then I guess you could truly transition from being a man to a woman. Until something like that occurs…

You asked if I only believe in “heterosexual” men and woman. One’s sexual preference is NOT the same as a person’s “belief” that they ARE in fact a different gender. So no… I believe men and woman can be gay or bi or asexual… not related to being trans, though the far left has consulted this issue because there’s maybe overlap in the Venn Diagram here.

Also the whole trans community is based on a false conflicting argument. Initially they claimed that “sex and gender were too different things”… I could go along with that… if that’s the argument then a Transwoman is NOT a woman, but instead he’s a “man who feels like a woman”. OK… I can agree with that.

Later, after people started accepting this they switched to “a transwoman is a woman.”

These are two separate and conflicting arguments. If gender and sex are different then fine… be a “transwoman”, that still means you don’t have access to women’s locker rooms, gyms, bathrooms, or athletic teams… because all those things are (and have forever been) based on one’s SEX, not one’s believe in what constitutes their “gender”.

Sex is objectively determined based on your dna and the bits you were born with. Gender is determined based on subjective feelings.

(Don’t try to confuse the subject with the hermaphrodite or “intersex” argument. Hermaphroditism and intersex issues are genetic disorders… no different than people born with Arthrogryposis. These are birth defects or genetic issues that do not change biology.)